Why should I remain Catholic vs. become a Buddhist or a Hindu?

[Frankie65]

If the Buddha is a Christian saint, then there cannot be too great a difference between the two religions.

Horror
Syncretism

 

[rossum]

Horror
Syncretism

Jesus is a Buddhist Bodhisattva.

The Buddha is a Christian saint.

Jesus is a Muslim Prophet.

Both are Baha’i Prophets.

Seems like that particular horse has bolted.

 

[Vico]

…
If the Buddha is a Christian saint, then there cannot be too great a difference between the two religions.

Rev. Leo A. Walsh, S.T.D. wrote ( May 11, 2011):

So while there are no non-Catholics that the Church recognizes as saints, the Church does recognize the possibility that non-Catholics and even non-Christians can be saved through the universal power of Christ’s passion, death and resurrection.

The Dalai Lama wrote in “The Good Heart: A Buddhist Perspective on the Teaching of Jesus” (Wisdom Publications, 1996):

The entire Buddhist worldview is based on a philosophical standpoint in which the central thought is the principle of interdependence, how all things and events come into being purely as a result of interactions between causes and conditions. Within that philosophical worldview, it is almost impossible to have any room for an atemporal, eternal, absolute truth. Nor is it possible to accommodate the concept of a divine Creation.

 

[ricmat]

Buddhism is not compatible with Christianity.

Love God above all else, and oh by the way, love your neighbor as yourself.

They totally don’t have, and don’t care about the Love God above all else part.

 

[rossum]

Buddhism is not compatible with Christianity.

Buddhism is an ‘enlightenment by works’ religion. Nobody else, not even one of the gods, is going to enlighten you. That is something you have to do for yourself.

None of the necessary works: avoid evil, do good, meditate, are contrary to Christianity. From the Buddhist side, the two are compatible.

Love God above all else, and oh by the way, love your neighbor as yourself.

The Buddha said: “Love others as you love yourself” – Bhadramayakaravyakarana sutra 91.

They totally don’t have, and don’t care about the Love God above all else part.

All gods are included in “love others” above.

 

[ricmat]

Buddhism is an ‘enlightenment by works’ religion. Nobody else, not even one of the gods, is going to enlighten you. That is something you have to do for yourself.

There are many things that we can’t do for ourselves. We didn’t create ourselves, and nonetheless we are here.

To think that we can totally enlighten ourselves is the pinnacle of hubris. Christianity calls for humility instead. Another incompatibility.

 

[rossum]

To think that we can totally enlighten ourselves is the pinnacle of hubris. Christianity calls for humility instead. Another incompatibility.

The Buddha was a human being and he enlightened himself. What one man did others can do and have been doing ever since. Enlightenment is not easy: it took the Buddha six years, but it can be done and it is still being done.

[At Polonnaruwa] I am able to approach the Buddhas barefoot and undisturbed, my feet in wet grass, wet sand. Then the silence of the extraordinary faces. The great smiles. Huge and yet subtle. Filled with every possibility, questioning nothing, knowing everything, rejecting nothing, the peace not of emotional resignation but of sunyata, that has seen through every question without trying to discredit anyone or anything – without refutation – without establishing some argument. For the doctrinaire, the mind that needs well established positions, such peace, such silence, can be frightening.

I was knocked over with a rush of relief and thankfulness at the obvious clarity of the figures, the clarity and fluidity of shape and line, the design of the monumental bodies composed into the rock shape and landscape, figure rock and tree. And the sweep of bare rock slopping away on the other side of the hollow, where you can go back and see different aspects of the figures. Looking at these figures I was suddenly, almost forcibly, jerked clean out of the habitual, half-tied vision of things, and an inner clearness, clarity, as if exploding from the rocks themselves, became evident and obvious. The queer evidence of the reclining figure, the smile, the sad smile of Ananda standing with arms folded (much more “imperative” than Da Vinci’s Mona Lisa because completely simple and straightforward).

The thing about all this is that there is no puzzle, no problem and really no “mystery.” All problems are resolved and everything is clear, simply because what matters is clear. The rock, all matter, all life is charged with dharmakaya … everything is emptiness and everything is compassion. I don’t know when in my life I have ever had such a sense of beauty and spiritual validity running together in one aesthetic illumination. … I mean, I know and have seen what I was obscurely looking for. I don’t know what else remains, but I have now seen and have pierced through the surface and have got beyond the shadow and the disguise. …

It says everything, it needs nothing. And because it needs nothing it can afford to be silent, unnoticed, undiscovered. It does not need to be discovered. It is we who need to discover it.

From: The Asian Journal of Thomas Merton

 

[ricmat]

The Buddha was a human being and he enlightened himself. What one man did others can do and have been doing ever since. Enlightenment is not easy: it took the Buddha six years, but it can be done and it is still being done.

OK. But just exactly how enlightened are they?

I ask because Catholic teaching says that because we are made in the image and likeness of God (who is infinite), and therefore we have longings for infinite things. Typically, people try all sorts of novelties in their search for infinite love, infinite beauty, infinite goodness, (infinite garage and closet space - LOL) etc. But nothing of the Earth can totally satisfy that infinite longing. Those longings for infinity must be satisfied by an infinite being, which we believe is God. Unless I am mistaken, you don’t put Buddha in that category.

BTW - Catholic teaching has a word for those who are “satisfied” with their non-infinite “enlightenments” - it’s called 'being lukewarm." Sort of “I’m enlightened enough and don’t need any more, thank you very much.”

That’s why I’m asking “just how enlightened” can you get with a source that is not infinite.

 

[rossum]

That’s why I’m asking “just how enlightened” can you get with a source that is not infinite.

You are applying Christian theology to Buddhism. That is as much of an error as would be me applying Buddhist theology to Christianity.

Buddhism relies on works, not on grace, for enlightenment. Those works are compatible with Christianity. There is an equivalent of grace in Buddhism, but it cannot take you over the whole journey. The first and last steps you have to do for yourself; it can only help for the middle part.

Trying to graft Christian concepts onto that is as useless as trying to graft sunyata onto Christianity.

 

[jack63]

I don’t know if others have mentioned this. My understanding is there is a different view of suffering between Buddhism and Christianity. Buddhism focuses on the cessation of suffering, while Christianity finds a great deal of hope in suffering. People do find this quite compelling, especially someone has gone through many struggles and much suffering.

I had a good childhood friend who went from Catholicism to Buddhism. He ended up marrying a Buddhist, but he was deeply interested in Buddhism beforehand though. I saw his conversion as sincere, even though I didn’t agree. From what I saw his experience as a Catholic wasn’t great, and it seemed to be a burden for him. He wasn’t taught about Catholicism well.

 

[0Scarlett_nidiyilii]

One of my friends from high school converted to Buddhism in his 40s because “Catholicism has too many rules”.

 

[Welshrabbit]

That’s hilarious (and a bit sad). I’m a convert to Catholicism partially because there are clear, concise rules to follow.

Different strokes for different folks I suppose.

 

[0Scarlett_nidiyilii]

I think it was also because he was in a new relationship and his GF was into Buddhism too

 

[rossum]

One of my friends from high school converted to Buddhism in his 40s because “Catholicism has too many rules”.

The good news is that Buddhism only has five rules instead of ten.

The bad news is that all the fun stuff is still against the rules.

 

[GiftofMercy]

The good news is that Buddhism only has five rules instead of ten.

The Ten Commandments are part of 62 that formed the Torah. Some of those rules are now rescinded, some remain for the Jewish people, and some greatly abridged for Christians.

 

[Vico]

…
All gods are included in “love others” above.

Well, not God the creator of all things.

Psalm 104

Praise of God the Creator
1 Bless the Lord, my soul!
Lord, my God, you are great indeed!
You are clothed with majesty and splendor,
2 robed in light as with a cloak.
You spread out the heavens like a tent;
3 setting the beams of your chambers upon the waters.
You make the clouds your chariot;
traveling on the wings of the wind.
4 You make the winds your messengers;
flaming fire, your ministers.

 

[rossum]

Well, not God the creator of all things.

God did not create Himself, so either God did not create all things or God is a no-thing. Take your pick.

If God exists, then He did not create all that exists.

 

[Vico]

Buddhism and converts

Well, not God the creator of all things.

God did not create Himself, so either God did not create all things or God is a no-thing. Take your pick.

If God exists, then He did not create all that exists.

God is not a creature but the creator of all creatures.

 

[rossum]

God is not a creature but the creator of all creatures.

I was not talking about “creatures” but about everything. God did not create everything because God did not create Himself. It is an error to say, “God created everything”.

 

[christofirst]

It is an error to say, “God created everything”.

I disagree, because for Christians, God is not a “thing.” God always existed. Is, was, and always will be. That’s a difficult concept for our timebound, finite minds. That’s why mystics like St. John of the Cross could ultimately only say of God, “Nada, nada, nada.” (“Nothing, nothing, nothing.”). Out of eternity, we believe, God created all things, and sustains all things. That’s why St. John of the Cross could also paradoxically say that God is, “Todo y nada.” (“Everything and nothing.”)